Heaven

This subject will be treated under seven headings:

I. Name and Place of Heaven;

II. Existence of Heaven;

III. Supernatural Character of Heaven and the Beatific Vision;

IV. Eternity of Heaven and Impeccability of the Blessed;

V. Essential Beatitude;

VI. Accidental Beatitude;

VII. Attributes of Beatitude.

I. NAME AND PLACE OF HEAVEN

The Name of Heaven

Heaven (Anglo-Saxon heofon, O. S. hevan and himil, originally
himin) corresponds to the Gothic himin-s. Both heaven and himil
are formed from himin by a regular change of consonants: heaven,
by changing m before n into v; and himil, by changing n of the
unaccented ending into l. Some derive heaven from the root ham,
"to cover" (cf. the Gothic ham-�n and the German Hem-d). According
to this derivation heaven would be conceived as the roof of the
world. Others trace a connection between himin (heaven) and home;
according to this view, which seems to be the more probable,
heaven would be the abode of the Godhead. The Latin coelum
(koilon, a vault) is derived by many from the root of celare "to
cover, to conceal" (coelum, "ceiling" "roof of the world").
Others, however think it is connected with the Germanic himin. The
Greek ouranos is probably derived from the root var, which also
connotes the idea of covering. The Hebrew name for heaven is
thought to be derived from a word meaning "on high"; accordingly,
heaven would designate the upper region of the world.

In the Holy Bible the term heaven denotes, in the first place, the
blue firmament, or the region of the clouds that pass along the
sky. Gen., i, 20, speaks of the birds "under the firmament of
heaven". In other passages it denotes the region of the stars that
shine in the sky. Furthermore heaven is spoken of as the dwelling
of God; for, although God is omnipresent, He manifests Himself in
a special manner in the light and grandeur of the firmament.
Heaven also is the abode of the angels; for they are constantly
with God and see His face. With God in heaven are likewise the
souls of the just (II Cor. 5:1; Matt., v, 3, 12). In Eph., iv, 8
sq., we are told that Christ conducted to heaven the patriarchs
who had been in limbo (limbus patrum). Thus the term heaven has
come to designate both the happiness and the abode of just in the
next life. The present article treats as heaven in this sense
only. In Holy Scripture it is called:

�  the kingdom of heaven (Matt., v, 3),

�  the kingdom of God (Mark, ix, 46),

�  the kingdom of the Father (Matt., xiii, 43),

�  the kingdom of Christ (Luke, xxii, 30),

�  the house of the Father (John, xiv, 2),

�  city of God, the heavenly Jerusalem (Hebr., xii),

�  the holy place (Hebr., ix, 12; D. V. holies),

�  paradise (II Cor., xii, 4),

�  life (Matt., vii, 14),

�  life ev (Matt., xix, 16),

�  the joy of the Lord (Matthew 25:21),

�  crown of life (James, i, 12),

�  crown of justice (II Timothy iv, 8),

�  crown of glory (I Peter, v, 4),

�  incorrup crown (I Cor., ix, 25),

�  great reward (Matthew 5:12),

�  inheritance of Christ (Eph., i, 18),

�  eternal inheritance (Hebr., ix, 15).

The Location of Heaven

Where is heaven, the dwelling of God and the blessed? Some are of
opinion that heaven is everywhere, as God is everywhere. According
to this view the blessed can move about freely in every part of
the universe, and still remain with God and see everywhere.
Everywhere, too, they remain with Christ (in His sacred Humanity)
and with the saints and the angels. For, according to the
advocates of this opinion, the spatial distances of this world
must no longer impede the mutual intercourse of blessed. In
general, however, theologians deem more appropriate that there
should be a Special and glorious abode, in which the blessed have
their peculiar home and where they usually abide, even though they
be free to go about in this world. For the surroundings in the
midst of which tbe blessed have their dwelling must be in
accordance with their happy state; and the internal union of
charity which joins them in affection must find its outward
expression in community of habitation. At the end of the world,
the earth together with the celestial bodies will be gloriously
transformed into a part of the dwelling-place of the blessed
(Apoc., xxi). Hence there seems to be no sufficient reason for
attributing a metaphorical sense to those numerous utterances of
the Bible which suggest a definite dwelling-place of the blessed.
Theologians, therefore, generally hold that the beaven of the
blessed is a special place with definite limits. Naturally, this
place is held to exist, not within the earth, but, in accordance
with the expressions of Scripture, without and beyond its limits.
All further details regarding its locality are quite uncertain.
The Church has decided nothing on this subject.

II. EXISTENCE OF HEAVEN

There is a heaven, i.e., God will bestow happiness and the richest
gifts on all those who depart this life free from original sin and
personal mortal sin, and who are, consequently, in the state of
justice and friendship with God. Concerning the purification of
those just souls who depart in venial sin or who are still subject
to temporal punishment for sin, see PURGATORY. On the lot of those
who die free from personal sin, but infected with original sin,
see LIMBO (limbus pervulorum). On the immediate beginning of
eternal happiness after death, or eventually, after the passage
through purgatory, see JUDGMENT, PARTICULAR. The existence of
heaven is, of course, denied by atheists, materialists, and
pantheists of all centuries as well as by those rationalists who
teach that the soul perishes with the body -- in short, by all who
deny the existence of God or the immortality of the soul. But, for
the rest, if we abstract from the specific quality and the
supernatural character of heaven, the doctrine has never met with
any opposition worthy of note. Even mere reason can prove the
existence of heaven or of the happy state of the just in the next
life.

We shall give a brief outline of the principal arguments. From
these we shall, at the same time, see that the bliss of heaven is
eternal and consists primarily in the possession of God, and that
heaven presupposes a condition of perfect happiness, in which
every wish of the heart finds adequate satisfaction.

�  God made all things for His objective honour and glory. Every
creature was to manifest His Divine perfections by becoming a
likeness of God, each according to its capacity. But man is
capable of becoming in the greatest and most perfect manner a
likeness of God, when he knows and loves His infinite perfections
with a knowledge and love analogous to God's own love and
knowledge. Therefore man is created to know God and to love Him.
Moreover, this knowledge and love is to be eternal; for such is
man's capability and his calling, because his soul is immortal.
Lastly, to know God and to love Him is the noblest occupation of
the human mind, and consequently also its supreme happiness.
Therefore man is created for eternal happiness; and he will
infallibly attain it hereafter, unless, by sin, he renders himself
unworthy of so high a destiny.

�  God made all things for His formal glory, which consists in the
knowledge and love shown Him by rational creatures. Irrational
creatures cannot give formal glory to God directly, but they
should assist rational creatures in doing so. This they can do by
manifesting God's perfections and by rendering other services;
whilst rational creatures should, by their own personal knowledge
and love of God, refer and direct all creatures to Him as their
last end. Therefore every intelligent creature in general, and man
in particular, is destined to know and love God for ever, though
he may forfeit eternal happiness by sin.

�  God, in his infinite justice and holiness, must give virtue its
due reward. But, as experience teaches, the virtuous do not obtain
a sufficient reward here; hence they will be recompensed
hereafter, and the reward must be everlasting, since the soul is
immortal. Nor can it be supposed that the soul in the next life
must merit her continuance in happiness by a continued series of
combats; for this would be repugnant to all the tendencies and
desires of human nature.

�  God, in His wisdom, must set on the moral law a sanction,
sufficiently appropriate and efficacious. But, unless each man is
rewarded according to the measure of his good works, such a
sanction could not be said to exist. Mere infliction of punishment
for sin would be insufficient. In any case, reward for good deeds
is the best means of inspiring zeal for virtue. Nature itself
teaches us to reward virtue in others whenever we can, and to hope
for a reward of our own good actions from the Supreme Ruler of the
universe. That reward, not being given here, will be given
hereafter.

�  God has implanted in the heart of man a love of virtue and a
love of happiness; consequently, God, because of His wisdom, must
by rewarding virtue establish perfect harmony between these two
tendencies. But such a harmony is not established in this life;
therefore it will be brought about in the next.

�  Every man has an innate desire for perfect beatitude.
Experience proves this. The sight of the imperfect goods of earth
naturally leads us to form the conception of a happiness so
perfect as to satisfy all the desires of our heart. But we cannot
conceive such a state without desiring it. Therefore we are
destined for a happiness that is perfect and, for that very
reason, eternal; and it will be ours, unless we forfeit it by sin.
A natural tendency without an object is incompatible both with
nature and with the Creator's goodness. The arguments thus far
advanced prove the existence of heaven as a state of perfect
happiness.

�  We are born for higher things, for the possession of God. This
earth can satisfy no man, least of all the wise. "Vanity of
vanities", says the Scripture (Eccles., i, 1); and St. Augustine
exclaimed: "Thou hast made us for Thyself (O God) and our heart is
troubled till it rests in Thee."

�  We are created for wisdom, for a possession of truth perfect in
its kind. Our mental faculties and the aspirations of our nature
give proof of this. But the scanty knowledge, that We can acquire
on earth stands in no proportion to the capabilities of our soul.
We shall possess truth in higher perfection hereafter.

�  God made us for holiness, for a complete and final triumph over
passion and for the perfect and secure possession of virtue. Our
natural aptitudes and desires bear witness to this. But this happy
goal is not reached on earth, but in the next life.

�  We are created for love and friendship, for indissoluble union
with our friends. At the grave of those we love our heart longs
for a future reunion. This cry of nature is no delusion. A joyful
and everlasting reunion awaits the just man beyond the grave.

�  It is the conviction of all peoples that there is a heaven in
which the just will rejoice in the next life. But, in the
fundamental questions of our being and our destiny, a conviction,
so unanimous and universal, cannot be erroneous. Otherwise this
world and the order of this world would remain an utter enigma to
intelligent creatures, who ought to know at least the necessary
means for reaching their appointed end.

�  Very few deny the existence of heaven; and these few are
practically all atheists and epicureans. But surely it cannot be
that all the rest have erred, and an isolated class of men such as
these are not the true guides in the most fundamental questions of
our being. For apostasy from God and His law cannot be the key to
wisdom.

Revelation also proclaims the existence of heaven. This we have
already seen in the preceding section from the many names by which
the Bible designates heaven; and from the texts of Scripture,
still to be quoted on the nature and peculiar conditions of
heaven.

III. SUPERNATURAL CHARACTER OF HEAVEN AND THE BEATIFIC VISION

(1) In heaven the just will see God by direct intuition, clearly
and distinctly. Here on earth we have no immediate perception of
God; we see Him but indirectly in the mirror of creation. We get
our first and direct knowledge from creatures, and then, by
reasoning from these, we ascend to a knowledge of God according to
the imperfect likeness which creatures bear to their Creaton But
in doing so we proceed to a large extent by way of negation, i.e.,
by removing from the Divine Being the imperfections proper to
creatures. In heaven, however, no creature will stand between God
and the soul. He himself will be the immediate object of its
vision. Scripture and theology tell us that the blessed see God
face to face. And because this vision is immediate and direct, it
is also exceedingly clear and distinct. Ontologists assert that we
perceive God directly in this life, though our knowledge of Him is
vague and obscure; but a vision of the Divine Essence, immediate
yet vague and obscure, implies a contradiction. The blessed see
God, not merely according to the measure of His likeness
imperfectly reflected in creation, but they see Him as He is,
after the manner of His own Being. That the blessed see God is a
dogma of faith, expressly defined by Benedict XII (1336):

We define that the souls of all the saints in heaven have seen and
do see the Divine Essence by direct intuition and face to face
[visione intuitiv� et etiam faciali], in such wise tbat nothing
created intervenes as an object of vision, but the Divine Essence
presents itself to their immediate gaze, unveiled, clearly and
openly; moreover, that in this vision they enjoy the Divine
Essence, and that, in virtue of this vision and this enjoyment,
they are truly blessed and possess eternal life and eternal rest"
(Denzinger, Enchiridion, ed. 10, n. 530--old edition, n, 456; cf.
nn. 693, 1084, 1458 old, nn. 588, 868).

The Scriptural argument is based especially on I Cor., xiii, 8-13
(cf. Matt., xviii, 10; I John, iii, 2; II Cor., v, 6-8, etc.). The
argument from tradition is carried out in detail by Petavius ("De.
theol. dogm.", I, i, VII, c. 7). Several Fathers, who seemingly
contradict this doctrine, in reality maintain it; they merely
teach that the bodily eye cannot see God, or that the blessed do
not fully comprehend God, or that the soul cannot see God with its
natural powers in this life (cf. Su�rez, "De Deo", l. II, c. 7, n.
17).

(2) It is of faith that the beatific vision is supernatural, that
it transcends the powers and claims of created nature, of angels
as well as of men. The opposite doctrine of the Beghards and
Beguines was condemned (1311) by the Council of Vienne (Denz., n.
475-old, n. 403), and likewise a similar error of Baius by Pius V
(Denz., n. 1003-old, n. 883). The First Vatican Council expressly
declared that man has been elevated by God to a supernatural end
(Denz., n. 1786--old, n. 1635; cf. nn. 1808, 1671--old, nn. 1655,
1527). In this connection we must also mention the condemnation of
the Ontologists, and in particular of Rosmini, who held that an
immediate but indeterminate perception of God is essential to the
human intellect and the beginning of all human knowledge (Denz.,
nn. 1659, 1927 -- old, nn. 1516, 1772). That the vision of God is
supernatural can also be shown from the supernatural character of
sanctifying grace (Denz., n. 1021-old, n. 901); for, if the
preparation for that vision is supernatural, then it is obvious
that the vision itself must be supernatural. Even unaided reason
recognizes that the immediate vision of God, even if it be at all
possible, can never be natural for a creature. For it is manifest
that every created mind first perceives its own self and creatures
similar to itself by which it is surrounded, and from these it
rises to a knowledge of God as the source of their being and their
last end. Hence its natural knowledge of God is necessarily
mediate and analogous; since it forms its ideas and judgments
about God after the imperfect likeness which its own self and its
surroundings bear to Him. Such is the only means nature offers for
acquiring a knowledge of God, and more than this is not due to any
created intellect; consequently, the second and essentially higher
way of seeing God by intuitive vision can but be a gratuitous gift
of Divine goodness. These considerations prove, not merely that
the immediate vision of God exceeds the natural claims of all
creatures in actual existence; but they also prove against
Ripalda, Becaenus, Morlais, and others, that God cannot create any
spirit which would, by virtue of its nature, be entitled to the
intuitive vision of the Divine Essence. Therefore, as theologians
express it, no created substance is of its nature supernatural;
however, the Church has given no decision on this matter. St.
Thomas seems to teach (I:12:1) that man has a natural desire for
the beatific vision. Elsewhere, however, he frequently insists on
the supernatural character of that vision (e. g. III:9:2, ad 3um).
Hence in the former place he obviously supposes that man knows
from revelation both the possibility of the beatific vision and
his destiny to enjoy it. On this supposition it is indeed quite
natural for man to have so strong a desire for that vision, that
any inferior kind of beatitude can no longer duly satisfy him.

(3) To enable it to see God, the intellect of the blessed is
supernaturally perfected by the light of glory (lumen gloriae).
This was defined by the Council of Vienne in 1311 (Denz., n. 475;
old, n. 403); and it is also evident from the supernatural
character of the beatific vision. For the beatific vision
transcends the natural powers of the intellect; therefore, to see
God the intellect stands in need of some supernatural strength,
not merely transient, but permanent as the vision itself. This
permanent invigoration is called the "light of glory", because it
enables the souls in glory to see God with their intellect, just
as material light enables our bodily eyes to see corporeal
objects. On the nature of the light of glory the Church has
decided nothing. Theologians have elaborated various theories
about it, which, however, need not be examined in detail.
According to the view commonly and perhaps most reasonably held,
the light of glory is a quality Divinely infused into the soul and
similar to sanctifying grace, the virtue of faith, and the other
supernatural virtues in the souls of the just. It is controverted
among theologians whether or not a mental image, be it a species
expressa or a species impressa, is required for the beatific
vision. But by many this is regarded as largely a controversy
about the appropriateness of the term, rather than about the
matter itself. The more common and probably more correct view
denies the presence of any image in the strict sense of the word,
because no created image can represent God as He is. The beatific
vision is obviously a created act inherent in the soul, and not,
as a few of the older theologians thought, the uncreated act of
God's own intellect communicated to the soul. For, as seeing and
knowing are immanent vital actions, the soul can see or know God
by its own activity only, and not through any activity exerted by
some other intellect.

(4) Theologians distinguish the primary and the secondary object
of the beatific vision. The primary object is God Himself as He
is. The blessed see the Divine Essence by direct intuition, and,
because of the absolute simplicity of God, they necessarily see
all His perfections and all the persons of the Trinity. Moreover,
since they see that God can create countless imitations of His
Essence, the entire domain of possible creatures lies open to
their view, though indeterminately and in general. For the actual
decrees of God are not necessarily an object of that vision,
except in as far as God pleases to manifest them. For just as the
Divine Essence, notwithstanding its simplicity, could exist
without these decrees, so God can also manifest His Essence
without manifesting them. Therefore finite things are not
necessarily seen by the blessed, even if they are an actual object
of God's will. Still less are they a necessary object of vision as
long as they are mere possible objects of the Divine will.
Consequently the blessed have a distinct knowledge of individual
possible things only in so far as God wishes to grant this
knowledge. Thus, if God so willed, a blessed soul might see the
Divine Essence without seeing in It the possibility of any
individual creature in particular. But in fact, there is always
connected with the beatific vision a knowledge of various things
external to God, of the possible as well as of the actual. All
these things, taken collectively, constitute the secondary object
of the beatific vision.

The blessed soul sees these secondary objects in God either
directly (formaliter), or in as far as God is their cause
(causaliter). It sees in God directly whatever the beatific vision
discloses to its immediate gaze without the aid of any created
mental image (species impressa); in God, as in their cause, the
soul sees all those things which it perceives with the aid of a
created mental image, a mode of perception granted by God as a
natural complement of the beatific vision. The number of objects
seen directly in God cannot be increased unless the beatific
vision itself be intensified; but the number of things seen in God
as their cause may be greater or smaller, or it may vary without
any corresponding change in the vision itself.

The secondary object of the beatific vision comprises everything
the blessed may have a reasonable interest in knowing. It
includes, in the first place, all the mysteries which the soul
believed while on earth. Moreover, the blessed see each other and
rejoice in the company of those whom death separated from them.
The veneration paid them on earth and the prayers addressed to
them are also known to the blessed. All that we have said on the
secondary object of the beatific vision is the common and reliable
teaching of theologians. Rosmini was condemned (Holy Office, 14
Dec., 1887), because he taught that the blessed do not see God
Himself, but only His relations to creatures (Denz., 1928-1930--
old, 1773-75). In the earlier ages we find Gregory the Great
("Moral.", l. XVIII, c. liv, n. 90) combating the error of a few
who maintained that the blessed do not see God, but only a
brilliant light streaming forth from Him. Also in the Middle Ages
there are traces of this error.

(5) Although the blessed see God, they do not comprehend Him,
because God is absolutely incomprehensible to every created
intellect, and He cannot grant to any creature the power of
comprehending Him as He comprehends Himself. Su�rez rightly calls
this a revealed truth ("De Deo", l. II, c. v, n. 6); for the
Fourth Council of the Lateran and the First Vatican Council
enumerated incomprehensibility among the absolute attributes of
God (Denz., nn. 428, 1782 -- old nn. 355, 1631). The Fathers
defend this truth against Eunomius, an Arian, who asserted that we
comprehend God fully even in this life. The blessed comprehend God
neither intensively nor extensively -- not intensively, because
their vision has not that infinite clearness with which God is
knowable and with which He knows Himself, nor extensively, because
their vision does not actually and clearly extend to everything
that God sees in His Essence. For they cannot by a single act of
their intellect represent every possible creature individually,
clearly, and distinctly, as God does; such an act would be
infinite, and an infinite act is incompatible with the nature of a
created and finite intellect. The blessed see the Godhead in its
entirety, but only with a limited clearness of vision (Deum totum
sed non totaliter). They see the Godhead in its entirety, because
they see all the perfections of God and all the Persons of the
Trinity; and yet their vision is limited, because it has neither
the infinite clearness that corresponds to the Divine perfections,
nor does it extend to everything that actually is, or may still
become, an object of God's free decrees. Hence it follows that one
blessed soul may see God more perfectly than another, and that the
beatific vision admits of various degrees

(6) The beatific vision is a mystery. Of course reason cannot
prove the impossibility of such a vision. For why should God, in
His omnipotence, be unable to draw so near and adapt Himself so
fully to our intellect, that the soul may, as it were, directly
feel Him and lay hold of Him and look on Him and become entirely
immersed in Him? On the other hand, we cannot prove absolutely
that this is possible; for the beatific vision lies beyond the
natural destiny of our intellect, and it is so extraordinary a
mode of perception that we cannot clearly understand either the
fact or the manner of its possibility.

(7) From what has been thus far said it is clear that there is a
twofold beatitude: the natural and the supernatural. As we have
seen, man is by nature entitled to beatitude, provided he does not
forfeit it by his own fault. We have also seen that beatitude is
eternal and that it consists in the possession of God, for
creatures cannot truly satisfy man. Again, as we have shown, the
soul is to possess God by knowledge and love. But the knowledge to
which man is entitled by nature is not an immediate vision, but an
analogous pereeption of God in the mirror of creation, still a
very perfect knowledge which really satisfies the heart. Hence the
beatitude to which alone we have a natural claim consists in that
perfect analogous knowledge and in the love corresponding to that
knowledge. This natural beatitude is the lowest kind of felicity
which God, in His goodness and wisdom, can grant to sinless man.
But, instead of an analogous knowledge of His Essence He may grant
to the blessed a direct intuition which includes all the
excellence of natural beatitude and surpasses it beyond measure.
It is this higher kind of beatitude that it has pleased God to
grant us. And by granting it He not merely satisfies our natural
desire for happiness but He satisfies it in superabundance.

IV. ETERNITY OF HEAVEN AND IMPECCABILITY OF THE BLESSED

It is a dogma of faith that the happiness of the blessed is
everlasting. This truth is clearly contained in the Holy Bible
(see Section I); it is daily professed by the Church in the
Apostles' Creed (credo . . . vitam aeternam), and it has been
repeatedly defined by the Church, especially by Benedict XII (cf.
Section III). Even reason, as we have seen, can demonstrate it.
And surely, if the blessed knew that their happiness was ever to
come to an end, this knowledge alone would prevent their happiness
from being perfect. In this matter Origen fell into error; for in
several passages ot his works he seems to incline to the opinion
that rational creatures never reach a permanent final state
(status termini), but that they remain forever capable of falling
away from God and losing their beatitude and of always returning
to Him again. The blessed are confirmed in good; they can no
longer commit even the slightest venial sin; every wish of their
heart is inspired by the purest love of God. That is, beyond
doubt, Catholic doctrine. Moreover this impossibility of sinning
is physical. The blessed have no longer the power of choosing to
do evil actions; they cannot but love God; they are merely free to
show that love by one good action in preference to another. But
whilst the impeccability of the blessed appears to be unanimously
held by theologians, there is a diversity of opinion as to its
cause. According to some, its proximate cause consists in this
that God absolutely withholds from the blessed His co-operation to
any sinful consent. The beatific Vision does not, they argue, of
its very nature exclude sin directly and absolutely; because God
may still displease the blessed soul in various ways, e.g., by
refusing a higher degree to beatitude, or by letting persons whom
that soul loves die in sin and sentencing them to eternal torment.
Moreover, when great sufferings and arduous duties accompany the
beatific vision, as was the case in the human nature of Christ on
earth, then at least the possibility of sin is not directly and
absolutely excluded. The ultimate cause of impeccability is the
freedom from sin or the state of grace in which at his death man
passes into the final state (status termini), i.e. into a state of
unchangeable attitude of mind and will. For it is quite in
consonance with the nature of that state that God should offer
only such co-operation as corresponds to the mental attitude man
chose for himself on earth. For this reason also the souls in
purgatory, although they do not see God, are still utterly
incapable of sin. The beatific vision itself may be called a
remote cause of impeccability; for by granting so wondrous a token
of His love, God may be said to undertake the obligation of
guarding from all sin those whom He so highly favours, whether by
refusing all co-operation to evil acts or in some other manner.
Besides, even if the clear vision of God, most worthy of their
love, does not render the blessed physically unable, it certainly
renders them less liable, to sin. Impeccability, as explained by
the representatives of this opinion, is not, properly speaking,
extrinsic, as is often wrongly asserted; but it is rather
intrinsic, because it is strictly due to the final state of
blessedness and especially to the beatific vision. This is
substantially the opinion of the Scotists, likewise of many
others, especially in recent times. Nevertheless the Thomists, and
with them the greater number of theologians, maintain that the
beatific vision of its very nature directly excludes the
possibility of sin. For no creature can have a clear intuitive
view of the Supreme Good without being by that very fact alone
irresistibly drawn to love it efficaciously and to fulfil for its
sake even the most arduous duties without the least repugnance.
The Church has left this matter undecided. The present writer
rather inclines to the opinion of the Scotists because of its
bearing on the question of the liberty of Christ. (See HELL,
Impenitence of the Damned.)

V. ESSENTIAL BEATITUDE

We distinguish objective and subjective beatitude. Objective
beatitude is that good, the possession of which makes us happy;
subjective beatitude is the possession of that good. The essence
of objective beatitude, or the essential object of beatitude is
God alone. For the possession of God assures us also the
possession of every other good we may desire; moreover, everything
else is so immeasurably inferior to God that its possession can
only be looked upon as something accidental to beatitude. Finally,
that all else is of minor importance for beatitude is evident from
the fact that nothing save God alone is capable of satisfying man.
Accordingly the essence of subjective beatitude is the possession
of God, and it consists in the acts of vision, love, and joy. The
blessed love God with a twofold love; with the love of
complacency, by which they love God for His own sake, and secondly
with the love less properly so called, by which they love Him as
the source of their happiness (amor concupiscentiae). In
consonance with this twofold love the blessed have a twofold joy;
firstly, the joy of love in the strict sense of the word, by which
they rejoice over the infinite beatitude which they see in God
Himself, precisely because it is the happiness of God whom they
love, and secondly, the joy springing from love in a wider sense,
by which they rejoice in God because He is the source of their own
supreme happiness. These five acts constitute the essence of
(subjective) beatitude, or in more precise terms, its physical
essence. In this theologians agree.

Here theologians go a step farther and inquire whether among those
five acts of the blessed there is one act, or a combination of
several acts, which constitutes the essence of beatitude in a
stricter sense, i.e. its metaphysical essence in contradistinction
to its physical essence. In general their answer is affirmative;
but in assigning the metaphysical essence their opinions diverge.
The present writer prefers the opinion of St. Thomas, who holds
that the metaphysical essence consists in the vision alone. For,
as we have just seen, the acts of love and joy are merely a kind
of secondary attributes of the vision; and this remains true,
whether love and joy result directly from the vision, as the
Thomists hold, or whether the beatific vision by its very nature
calls for confirmation in love and God's efficacious protection
against sin.

VI. ACCIDENTAL BEATITUDE

Besides the essential object of beatitude the souls in heaven
enjoy many blessings accidental to beatitude. We shall mention
only a few:

�  In heaven there is not the least pain or sadness; for every
aspiration of nature must be finally realized. The will of the
blessed is in perfect harmony with the Divine will; they feel
displeasure at the sins of men, but without experiencing any real
pain.

�  They delight greatly in the company of Christ, the angels, and
the saints, and in the reunion with so many who were dear to them
on earth.

�  After the resurrection the union of the soul with the glorified
body will be a special source of joy for the blessed. (See
RESURRECTION.)

�  They derive great pleasure from the contemplation of all those
things, both created and possible, which, as we have shown, they
see in God, at least indirectly as in the cause. And, in
particular, after the last judgment the new heaven and the new
earth will afford them manifold enjoyment. (See JUDGMENT,
GENERAL.)

�  The blessed rejoice over sanctifying grace and the supernatural
virtues that adorn their soul; and any sacramental character they
may have also adds to their bliss.

�  Very special joys are granted to the martyrs, doctors, and
virgins, a special proof of victories won in time of trial (Apoc.,
vii, 11 sq.; Dan., xii, 3; Apoc., xiv, 3 sq.). Hence theologians
speak of three particular crowns, aureolas, or glorioles, by which
these three classes of blessed souls are accidentally honoured
beyond the rest. Aureola is a diminutive of aurea, i.e. aurea
corona (golden crown). (Cf. St. Thomas, Supp:96.)

Since eternal happiness is metaphorically called a marriage of the
soul with Christ, theologians also speak of the bridal endowments
of the blessed. They distinguish seven of these gifts, four of
which belong to the glorified body -- light, impassibility,
agility, subtility (see RESURRECTION); and three to the soul --
vision, possession, enjoyment (visio, comprehensio, fruitio). Yet
in the explanation given by the theologians of the three gifts of
the soul we find but little conformity. We may identify the gift
of vision with the habit of the light of glory, the gift of
possession with the habit of that love in a wider sense which has
found in God the fulfilment of its desires, and the gift of
enjoyment we may identify with the habit of love properly so
called (halitus caritatis) which rejoices to be with God; in this
view these three infused habits would he considered simply as
ornaments to beautify the soul. (Cf. St. Thomas, Supp:95)

VII. ATTRIBUTES OF BEATITUDE

There are various degrees of beatitude in heaven corresponding to
the various degrees of merit. This is a dogma of faith, defined by
the Council of Florence (Denz., n. 693 -- old, n. 588). The Bible
teaches this truth in very many passages (e.g., wherever it speaks
of eternal happiness as a reward), and the Fathers defend it
against the heretical attacks of Jovinian. It is true that,
according to Matt., xx, 1-16, each labourer receives a penny; but
by this comparison Christ merely teaches that, although the Gospel
was preached to the Jews first, yet in the Kingdom of Heaven there
is no distinction between Jew and Gentile, and that no one will
receive a greater reward merely because of being a son of Judah.
The various degrees of beatitude are not limited to the accidental
blessings, but they are found first and foremost in the beatific
vision itself. For, as we have already pointed out, the vision,
too, admits of degrees. These essential degrees of beatitude are,
as Su�rez rightly observes ("De beat.", d. xi, s. 3, n. 5), that
threefold fruit Christ distinguishes when He says that the word of
God bears fruit in some thirty, in some sixty, in some a
hundredfold (Matt., xiii, 23). And it is by a mere accommodation
of the text that St. Thomas (Supp:96, aa. 2 sqq.) and other
theologians apply this text to the different degrees in the
accidental beatitude merited by married persons, widows, and
virgins.

The happiness of heaven is essentially unchangeable; still it
admits of some accidental changes. Thus we may suppose that the
blessed experience special joy when they receive greater
veneration from men on earth. In particular, a certain growth in
knowledge by experience is not excluded; for instance, as time
goes on, new free actions of men may become known to the blessed,
or personal observation and experience may throw a new light on
things already known. And after the last judgment accidental
beatitude will receive some increase from the union of soul and
body, and from the sight of the new heaven and the earth.

In addition to the authorities cited in the text, the following
works may he consulted: PETRUS LOMBARDUS, IV Sent., dist. xlix,
and his commentators; ST. THOMAS, I:12; I-II:2:1-5; Supplement
Questions 92, 93, 94, 95, and 96.

JOSEPH HONTHEIM


http://www.knight.org/advent

From the Catholic Encyclopedia, copyright � 1913 by the
Encyclopedia Press, Inc. Electronic version copyright � 1996 by
New Advent, Inc.

Taken from the New Advent Web Page (www.knight.org/advent).

This article is part of the Catholic Encyclopedia Project, an
effort aimed at placing the  entire Catholic Encyclopedia 1913
edition on the World Wide Web. The coordinator is Kevin Knight,
editor of the New Advent Catholic Website. If you would like to
contribute to this  worthwhile project, you can contact him by e-
mail at (knight.org/advent). For  more information please download
the file cathen.txt/.zip.

-------------------------------------------------------

  Provided courtesy of:

       Eternal Word Television Network
       PO Box 3610
       Manassas, VA 22110
       Voice: 703-791-2576
       Fax: 703-791-4250
       Web: http://www.ewtn.com
       Email address: [email protected]

-------------------------------------------------------

You are viewing proxied material from gopher.ratthing.com. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.